Funny that!

Here is a site I found where the real men are pushing back the gay men and girlie men. Boys raised by homosexuals will turn out gay in 70% of cases but boys raised by heterosexual families still have a good chance of growing up masculine.

Trying to raise a real man in today’s world may be harder than splitting an atom. Everyday our kids are bombarded with images and messages of the most unmanly things imaginable. Magazines are full of sexually ambiguous models dressed in feminine clothes in homo-erotic poses. There’s a new book out every month about how you don’t need a man in the house to raise a man. TV shows typically are full of metro-sexual, gay, and otherwise wimpy male characters, and nearly every Hollywood movie that comes out has at least one homosexual character. Almost every dad in the movies or on TV is either a miserable lout or a complete buffoon. At school your kids are subjected to all sorts of programs designed to promote unmanly lifestyles. Real men have disappeared from history books and have been replaced with politically correct figures. Any boy reading magazines, attending public school, and watching TV or movies would assume that half of the men in the world are gay, and the other half are metro-sexual or girlie men. That’s why your job as a father is as tough as it’s even been. It’s you against the world.

Let’s be clear about a dad’s role in raising a child. It takes a man and a woman to raise a real man. A boy needs a mother to nurture him, and take care of him. He also needs the influence of a strong, masculine male figure in his life. These influences balance each other out. If you’re missing either influence, you tend to get less than optimal results.

You will enjoy the rest of the article.

Real Men Mag

RAISING A REAL MAN IN A METRO-SEXUAL WORLD

It is the ugly side of our country: children being brutilised and killed by adults who should be protecting them; escalating levels of bullying in schools; hordes of disorderly youths causing mayhem on the streets; gangs in control of a lucrative drug trade that has infiltrated deep into communities all around the country. These are problems that are now so serious they cannot be ignored.

The reality is that increasing violence is destroying lives on a daily basis. Hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayers’ money is being spent on mopping up the damage with massive human resources needed for front-line crisis work. Endless minds are engaged in devising strategies to deal with the problems, but while many well-meaning people come up with many well-meaning ‘solutions’, few – if any – are prepared to deal with the real root cause of this social crisis.

The fact is that endless studies show that virtually every major social pathology we face can be linked back to the breakdown of the family: violent crime, drugs and alcohol abuse, truancy, unwed pregnancy, suicide, psychological disorders – these all correlate more strongly to the absence of a biological married father in the home than with any other single factor.

The majority of prisoners, juvenile detention inmates, high school dropouts, pregnant teenagers, adolescent murderers, and rapists come from fatherless homes. The connection between single-parent households and crime is so strong that controlling for this factor erases the relationship between race and crime as well as between low income and crime.1

New Zealand’s Principal Youth Court Judge, Andrew Becroft, recently released figures from a study of youth crime that confirms that the majority of serious youth offenders – a staggering 82 percent - have lost contact with their father: only 12 percent of the offenders who came through the court were living with both parents, 28 percent were living with one parent (usually their mother) and 60 percent were not living with either their mother or their father.2

That is clearly not to say that every child being raised without a dad ends up in trouble, or that every child raised by a married couple does well, but on the balance of probability, children raised without their natural father, will face greater difficulties in life, than children brought up with their dad to love, guide and protect them.

Fathers play a vital role in bringing up their children. From the rough and tumble play with toddlers, to the crucial task of setting boundaries, enforcing discipline and challenging children to accept responsibilities and become more independent, a father’s influence is crucial. It is especially the case in the socialisation of teenagers, where a father will provide a role model of what men are supposed to be like on the job, in the home, with women, and with children.

Judge Becroft has described the deep-seated need that boys have for a father figure in this way: “14, 15, and 16 year-old boys seek out role models like ‘heat seeking missiles’. It’s either the leader of the Mongrel Mob or it’s a sports coach or it’s Dad. But an overwhelming majority of boys who I see in the Youth Court have lost contact with their father. …What I’m saying is that I’m dealing in the Youth Court with boys for whom their Dad is simply not there, never has been, gone, vanished and disappeared”.

It is this collapse of fatherhood that is at the heart of New Zealand’s social crisis. There are now hundreds of thousands of New Zealand children growing up in fatherless homes. Too many live in crime-ridden neighborhoods where violence is the norm, where alcohol and drug abuse are commonplace, and where disaffected dropouts roam the streets instead of being meaningfully engaged in school.

According to Judge Becroft an astonishing 80 percent of teenage offenders who go through the youth court have drug or alcohol problems and a staggering 70 percent aren’t enrolled in any form of education!3

This crisis is of the government’s own making. While the seeds of family disintegration were sown by the Labour Government in the seventies - with policies designed to progress the feminists’ agenda of independence for women - successive National governments allowed the situation to get worse.

At the core of the problem is the Domestic Purposes Benefit. Labour introduced the DPB in order to provide unhappy mothers with an alternative to a husband. The DPB gave an unconditional state guaranteed welfare benefit to any woman who wanted to raise a child on her own. Over the years the DPB has become a way of life for hundreds of thousands of women and their children. Many of these are now caught up in a cycle of intergenerational welfare dependency to become part of New Zealand’s growing dysfunctional underclass.

This week’s NZCPR Guest Commentator is renowned author and commentator Sir Bob Jones. In his opinion piece Homo Degeratus, Bob describes - in his forthright way - how a “welfare-sated under-class … is now thriving in New Zealand; slobbering, tattooed, illiterate, pig-ignorant, prolific breeding, drug-infested, alcoholic, welfare dependent, murdering and robbing, barbaric filth and it is all traceable solely to welfare excess and the DPB in particular. I for one have had enough. Disproportionately Maori, their existence is a disgrace, not to Maoridom but to the human race”.

Bob echoes the despair of many New Zealanders when he states: “I sense and personally feel, a widespread sense of hopelessness about the current state of affairs. The solution lies with our politicians but what odds on a set of political circumstances which would throw up another Douglas to embark on a radical social reform as Roger did on the economic front?

He explains, “Ironically, when I write that the solution lies with politicians I could just as easily say that the problem stems from them. Primarily motivated by the pursuit of power, once in office the record shows that politicians driving modus operandi is not to rock the boat”. To read Homo Degeratus, click the sidebar link>>>

Bob is right, of course. It is difficult to find any political will to reform the welfare system in general and the DPB in particular - even though the politicians are well aware that children are the major victims of a system that is supposed to protect them.

No other country has a benefit payment that is as unconstrained as New Zealand’s Domestic Purposes Benefit. As Bob Jones mentions in his article, when the US realised the damage to children – and society - that was being caused by their equivalent of the DPB, President Clinton abolished it. He replaced it with a system that prioritised getting mothers off benefits and back into the workforce. Independence from the state was seen as the key goal. And in spite of a plethora of dire predictions about the consequences, the results have been very positive for all concerned.

New Zealand desperately needs politicians with the courage to do what is right for the country and replace the DPB with a system of temporary support based on work - similar to that found in many other developed countries. Hardship payments should be available for deserted or mistreated spouses, and the parents of teenagers should realise that the responsibility for supporting their teenager to have children of their own, will largely fall on their shoulders.

Most importantly, it should be signalled loud and clear that it is simply no longer acceptable to bear children if they are not going to be properly raised and supported. Children need a mother and a father who will love, nurture and support them, if they are to have the best opportunity at leading a successful and fulfilling life. That means encouraging marriage, since, despite its intrinsic faults, marriage still remains the bedrock institution of civil society providing the glue that binds mothers and fathers together for the common purpose of raising their children well.

Of course, much more needs to be done to support those parents with children who are presently running amuck: special schools with live-in facilities to give these children the routines and boundaries that they will be missing in their home-life may have a place. More than anything, the priority must be to connect these children with the education system, because no matter how bad a child’s home-life may be, an education can provide a life-line to a better future.

There is also much that needs to be done to fight the growing crime and violence within our society – but that is another subject for another day.

While none of this is simple, what we categorically know is that if we carry on as we have in the past, we will end up with a future that is far more violent and problematic that the one we face today. Doing nothing is not an option.

New Zealand urgently needs political leadership in the area of welfare reform. The DPB needs to be replaced as a priority and fatherhood needs to be restored. It is time the political parties stepped up to this challenge.

Political research

By John Jalsevac

Spain, June 26, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - What began fifteen years ago as a fringe cause of the most extreme wing of the environmentalist movement has just yesterday been given an unprecedented level of recognition by the government of a developed Western nation.

A Spanish parliamentary committee yesterday gave its support to a resolution that would grant so-called “great apes” the rights to life, liberty and freedom from torture.

According to numerous mainstream reports, the environmental committee’s resolution is supported across party lines and is expected to be passed by parliament, thereby coming into effect as law.

“This is a historic day in the struggle for animal rights and in defense of our evolutionary comrades, which will doubtless go down in the history of humanity,” said Pedro Pozas, Spanish director of the Great Apes Project (GAP). “We have no knowledge of great apes being used in experiments in Spain, but there is currently no law preventing that from happening.”

Should the committee’s resolution become law a major new animal rights precedent would be established making it illegal in Spain to use apes, including chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orang-utans in experiments.

According to a Reuters report, it will also become illegal to keep apes in circuses, or for the purposes of television commercials or filming.

The movement to grant apes human rights began in earnest fifteen years ago with the founding of GAP in 1993. Peter Singer, the same Princeton bioethicist who has argued that doctors should be permitted to kill newborn infants up to the age of 30 days old, has been one of the primary intellectual forces behind the movement.

Since it’s inception GAP has lobbied in favor of a UN Declaration on Great Apes. That Declaration demands, “the extension of the community of equals to include all great apes: human beings, chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orang-utans.

“The community of equals is the moral community within which we accept certain basic moral principles or rights as governing our relations with each other and enforceable at law.”

The list of “moral principles or rights” includes the three “rights” included in the Spanish parliamentary committee’s resolution. Currently, however, it is not clear what penalties, if any, would be levied against an ape should an ape violate these moral principles by, for example, killing or injuring a human being or another ape in a case where it was not necessary for self defence.

To those who have been observing events in Spain these last several years under the socialist government of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, it comes as no surprise that such an unprecedented resolution would be passed first in Spain.

Prime Minister Zapatero’s Socialist government has taken Spain from being one of the most conservative countries in Europe, to being one of the most “progressive.” Since coming into power the Zapatero government has legalized homosexual “marriage”, marginalized the Catholic Church and the nation’s Judeo-Christian heritage on the whole, opened access to abortion, and otherwise embraced nearly every anti-life, anti-family, anti-tradition and anti-religious trend currently making its way through the West.

Spain, however, is not the only Western country to take seriously the movement to grant legal rights to beings other than humans. In fact, the push for legal rights for non-humans took a step into new territory within the last several months with the release of a report by the Swiss Ethics Committee on Non Human Gene Technology (ECNH). The ECNH, which had previously released reports on primates and animals, broke new ground by exploring the “dignity” of plants.

ECNH’s study of plants stated, “The Committee members unanimously consider an arbitrary harm caused to plants to be morally impermissible. This kind of treatment would include, e.g. decapitation of wild flowers at the roadside without rational reason.” A majority of the committee also concluded that plants, “are excluded for moral reasons from absolute ownership. By this interpretation no one may handle plants entirely according to his/her own desires.”

While traditional Judeo/Christian morality has always acknowledged that God’s creations, or nature, be always treated with respect, GAP, Peter Singer, and the like are instead promoting a utilitarian philosophy that denies the very distinction between plants, animals and humans, putting them on a fundamentally equal footing.

As bioethicist Wesley Smith explains on his blog in a post on the Spanish resolution, “Of course the purpose of this isn’t to merely improve the treatment of great apes - which could be accomplished as it already has been in some places via normal animal welfare statutes. Rather, the explicit point of the GAP is revolutionary - to demote human beings from the uniquely valuable species and into merely another animal in the forest.

“Once people accept that premise,” he continues, “Judeo/Christian philosophy goes to the guillotine allowing the utilitarian agenda to proceed unhindered, leading in turn to the moral value of the weak and vulnerable among us becoming archaic, resulting in their loss of the right to life and being used instrumentally for those deemed more valuable. (Lest you think we exaggerate, check out Peter Singer’s writings, and who can deny that his values are triumphing?)”

Smith concludes, “In the world being born out of the ashes of the sanctity/equality of human life ethic, value will be subjective and rights temporary - depending on one’s individual capacities rather than humanity. And we will see apes - animals (and eventually other animals), which are completely oblivious about the hue and cry being mounted against human worth in their names - being viewed as more important than some humans.”

By Hilary White

SHEFFIELD, May 23, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - A Muslim husband from Sheffield England, has launched a complaint that an all-woman driving school has sent a man to teach his wife to drive. The teacher in question, Andrew Sherdley, who now calls himself "Emma", is legally considered a woman by the British government. 

Sherdley, who was married with two children, has obtained a legal birth certificate and "gender recognition certificate" even though he has yet to undergo surgery. He called the complaints "hurtful, offensive and deeply upsetting". The man who complained, who remains unnamed in the press, called the school and accused management of assigning his wife a male teacher, "disguised as a woman" and "with a deep voice", because he was a Muslim. In traditional Muslim communities, it is considered improper for a married woman to be alone with a man who is not a relative.

Joanne Dixon, the owner of Laugh n Pass, said, "Here at Laugh n Pass we says each of our female instructors promise to be friendly, professional and patient - that is exactly what Emma is and for her to be subjected to abuse and threats is simply intolerable." The man is threatening to sue the school because it presented Sherdley as a woman. The school maintains the claim that it has an entirely female teaching staff.

The practice of "gender reassignment" or sex-change therapy comes from the popular opinion among psychiatrists that there is a distinction between a person’s sex and his "gender". The theory, promoted heavily by the homosexualist movement, is that sex is genetically and hormonally determined from conception, while gender is culturally conditioned and is therefore malleable. Hence the theory of "gender dysphoria" where a person feels as though he was born with a sex that conflicts with his "gender".

Paul McHugh, Director of Psychiatry at Johns Hopkins University and Psychiatrist-in-Chief of the Johns Hopkins Hospital believes that the acceptance of transexualism and gender reassignment therapy is a "misdirection" for the field of psychiatry. Classifying transsexualism as merely one symptom in a larger complex of personality disorders, McHugh had long believed that psychiatrists should treat such patients with the talking cure, not radical, irreversible surgeries.

McHugh was among the voices protesting this month when Boston Children’s Hospital announced it was opening a clinic for "transgendered" children. Dr. Norman Spack, a paediatric specialist at the hospital, launched the clinic that offers younger patients counselling and drugs to delay puberty. This, he says, allows patients more time to decide whether they want to make the change.

Writing in First Things magazine in 2005, McHugh bluntly identifies the "transgender" condition as a psychological disorder treatable with talking therapy.

But the concept of a nearly infinitely malleable "gender" has been identified as primarily a political, not a medical concept. It is the result of certain philosophical and political trends that became popular in the 1960s and ’70s with the growth of the radical feminist movement. Since then this notion of multiple "genders" has flourished through the work of radical feminist lobbyists at the United Nations who have worked for years to downgrade traditional notions of gender and the family.

A long-time family campaigner at the United Nations, Babette Francis, told LifeSiteNews.com in 2003 that radical "genderist" lobbyists at the UN now count as many as eleven "genders". 

Francis said, "There were asexual, homosexual, bisexual, hermaphrodite, transvestite, transgendered. And the ‘transgendered’ further divided into those who have had the hormones but not the surgery, those who have had both hormones and surgery, and those who have had the surgery but are not happy and want to go back."

Read related LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Children’s Hospital Boston Offers "Sex Change" to Adolescents

http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/apr/08042107.html

 Interview With Babette Francis on the UN’s Destruction of the Concept of Gender
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2004/mar/040323a.html

Appeal taken to European Court of Human Rights

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

VIENNA, May 23, 2008 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Austrian animal rights activists who tried and failed to get a chimpanzee legally declared a person have taken their battle to the European Court of Human Rights.

Austria’s Supreme Court upheld a lower court ruling in January that rejected a request to appoint a legal guardian for the chimp, who has been given the human-sounding name Matthew Hiasl Pan.


LifeSiteNews.com reported last April on the initiation of this case, which was spearheaded by Dr. Martin Balluch, president of Austria’s Association Against Animal Factories, and centered around animal rights activist and British teacher Paula Stibbe’s request to be appointed as the chimps guardian if the bankrupt animal sanctuary where he lives in Vienna is forced to close.

In dismissing the activists’ request to appoint a guardian for the animal, the lower court ruled that “Matthew” was neither mentally impaired nor in danger, the legal grounds required for a guardian to be appointed. It did not directly address the issue of whether a chimpanzee can be considered a person.

The activists responded by filing an appeal to the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France, which has agreed to a preliminary hearing to determine whether chimpanzees are entitled to the legal status and protections granted to human beings. 

Miss Stibbe said she is not trying to get the chimp declared a human, just a person. “Everybody who knows him personally will see him as a person,” she told the London Evening Standard.

“In his home in the African jungle, he would have been well able to look after himself without a guardian. Since he has no close relatives, I am doing this as the person closest to him.”

A spokesman for the court in Strasbourg said, “Any application regarding this chimpanzee will be considered at a primary level by a magistrate and a lawyer before we decide whether it deserves a full-blown hearing.”

The consequence of a successful outcome for the animal rights group would be the setting of legal precedent for monkeys and possibly other animals to receive the rights, protections, and even medical, financial, and social benefits of human beings.

It may even establish the groundwork for a legal challenge on “Matthew’s” behalf to give him the right to vote, in which case the LifeSiteNews epithet “Loonie England” may be somewhat extended to other nearby realms.

Read previous LifeSiteNews.com coverage:
Austrian Court to Decide if Chimpanzee is Deserving of “Human Status”
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/apr/07040401.html
 

Janet Albrechtsen
April 30, 2008

IF you are a man, sex got a whole lot more dangerous. Consider this scenario.
A woman meets a man in a bar or at a party. She likes the man. He likes the woman. She may not normally be a sex on the first night kind of girl. But they have a number of drinks. Fuelled by alcohol, they put aside their inhibitions. The woman goes home with the man. She says yes to sex. In the morning, the man makes it clear it was a one-night stand. The woman is deeply offended and regrets her drunken decision. She claims rape. Under new rape laws introduced in NSW this year, that man is likely to be convicted as a rapist. He is likely to go to prison.

Rape reform in NSW means that post-coital regrets can now be refashioned into rape claims that send innocent men to prison. That’s why Gold Coast Titans footballer Anthony Laffranchi is a fortunate man. He walked free from a rape charge last week after the prosecution failed to establish lack of consent. He and his then Wests Tigers NRL teammates met a woman at the Sapphire Club in Kings Cross in September 2006 and continued to party at a teammate’s apartment. The footballer said he had consensual sex. The woman, who was “significantly affected” by alcohol, claimed she was raped. Had Laffranchi met the woman after January this year, he would probably be a convicted rapist facing a long stint in prison.

Let us be clear. Rape is wrong. It is a crime that calls for imprisonment. It can destroy a victim’s life. But let us be clear about something else. Wrongful claims of rape are made. And they can destroy a man’s life. No one knows whether a rape occurred that night when Laffranchi had sex with the woman. But under the old laws of rape, the defendant’s actual state of mind was critical. If the accused had an honest belief that sex was consensual, the rape charge failed. And when the evidence became a simple contest between “he said, she said”, a reasonable doubt would lead to an acquittal. Criminal law says that is as it should be; we are talking about a serious crime and imprisonment.

Not anymore. Now the rules have changed. Now, in a contest between he said it was consensual and she said it was rape, a jury may be forced to convict the man of rape without any further corroborating evidence.

The new laws say that if a woman is “substantially affected” by alcohol, she may lack the capacity to consent to sex even if she says “yes” to sex. More disturbing, even if a man honestly believes consent was given, his state of mind is now irrelevant. Now, the man is effectively deemed to have knowledge of lack of consent if there are no reasonable grounds for believing consent was given. And it gets worse. When asked to determine whether the man had no reasonable grounds for believing the woman gave consent, the jury must ignore the fact that the man was drunk.

In other words, the fact that the woman who says “yes” to sex is drunk is highly relevant: it may vitiate her consent. But the man’s intoxication must be ignored when working out whether he had “reasonable grounds” for believing consent was given. It is a curious law that says alcohol only affects the cognitive abilities of women.

These new rape laws degrade women. They treat them as helpless victims, stripping them of the power to make decisions about sex after consuming alcohol. Down a few too many Bacardi Breezers, and the law says you are no longer responsible for your actions. Is this really the message we want to send to young women?

And for men, it’s even more serious. As the President of the NSW Bar Association, Anna Katzmann SC, has pointed out, these new laws mean that the intoxicated man will be treated just like “the true rapist, the aggressor who inflicts himself on his victim, knowing they do not consent”. There is no gradation of penalties.

Why is this happening? Lawyers point to the perfect storm. The intoxicated man is trapped between a strident but misguided feminist agenda and the law and order lobby driven by perceptions that rape conviction rates are too low.

In reality, the low conviction rates reflect nothing more than the reasonable doubt that arises when, absent other evidence about an alleged crime in private, a woman claims rape and a man claims sex was consensual.

Stephen Odgers, a senior Sydney silk who chairs the Criminal Law Committee of the Bar Association, told The Australian that, while we all want a civilised world where people treat each other with mutual respect in all walks of life, including sexual interactions, the new rape laws are a “very blunt and brutal instrument” to educate and civilise us about sexual relations. He fears that the new rape laws, in effect, can be used to criminalise those who merely treat others with disrespect after a night of sex. “And people will end up going to jail for long periods as a result.” That is why his committee, made up of almost equal numbers of prosecutors and defence lawyers opposed the reforms.

So how does a man navigate the consent nightmare? Bring a witness into the bedroom? Perhaps bring along a lawyer to guide him through every stage of consensual sex from foreplay to orgasm to ensure that the final, breathless and drunken “yes, yes, yes” is genuine consent? Similar rape reforms in South Australia led independent MP Ann Bressington to suggest earlier this month that perhaps “parliament could devise a sex contract which men could carry around in their pocket, next to their condoms”. Bressington is concerned that otherwise sensible rape reform has gone too far, leaving “very little room for a decent defence of a man who has been falsely accused”.

False accusations are helped along, says Heather MacDonald in the winter edition of City Journal, by feminist victimology and rape industrialists intent on redefining drunken sex where a bloke wants to get inside a girl’s knickers in terms of the classic case of domination rape by power-hungry men.

If you are a man, you are entitled to be frightened by the new order. While society is still committed to a 1960s model of sexual liberation, encouraging men and women to explore their sexual desires, the state is also entering the bedroom trying to educate us about appropriate sexual conduct. Unfortunately, we may discover that civility cannot be legislated by criminal sanction without innocent men going to prison.

janeta@bigpond.net.au

I have tried AVG, AntiVir, Spydoctor and many other free downloads. In the end I preferred to pay Telecom $7 a month for their brand. But now I have found Anti Virus software that is free only for private and non-commercial use.

And it is good.

ANTIVIRUS KERNEL

* Almost 100% detection
* Outstanding performance
* Reasonable memory requirements
* ICSA certified

USER INTERFACE

* Memory test during the program startup
* Very intuitive Simple User Interface
* Testing whole disks or selected folders
* Working with the scan results - actions with infected files
* Virus encyclopaedia
* Log Viewer
* Various appearances - skin support
* Running from Explorer context menu
* Antivirus screen-saver

UPDATES

* The system of incremental updates guarantees low traffic
* The updates can be completely automatic

RESIDENT PROTECTION

* Standard Shield protects the file system
* Generic SMTP/POP3/IMAP4 scanner
* Specific MS Outlook plugin
* Heuristic analysis in e-mail modules

REPAIRING

* Limited capability of direct repair (especially macroviruses)
* Repairing files using automatically generated Virus Recovery Database (VRDB)

PLATFORMS

* Windows 95
* Windows 98
* Windows Me
* Windows NT 4 (No Server)
* Windows 2000 (No Server)
* Windows XP (No Server)
* Windows Vista

Free antivirus - avast! 4 Home Edition dowload

Cleaner Free Download anti virus

Key for Avastavast! Virus

If you are a bit lost on these pages, you can download from here. DOWNLOAD

Education Director-General Michael Coutts-Trotter emerged as a leader of the school anti-homophobia campaign, opening a Government-backed conference on sexual diversity - That’s So Gay. The Federation of Parents and Citizens’ Associations also weighed into the debate calling for “appropriate literacy materials promoting diversity in families”. The radical shake-up means that families with two mums or two dads are set to be accepted as a normal part of school communities.
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,23551033-5001021,00.html
Family First Comment : part of a disturbing international trend
California - Mom and Dad” as well as “husband and wife” have been banned from California schools READ MORE
Scotland - Use of ‘Mom’ and ‘Dad’ Too “Homophobic”, Scottish Nurses Told READ MORE
New Zealand - Human Rights Commission (supported by the teachers’ union PPTA!!) says schools should let children change gender, allow kids to choose which uniform they wish to wear (boys or girls), and decide which changing room they want to change in!!! READ MORE
UK - Government advisory group says don’t say mum and dad… teachers told not to assume pupils have heterosexual parents. At the same time, schools should encourage gay role models among staff, parents and governors. Homosexual staff should be able to discuss their private lives after the consultation with the head teacher. READ MORE

But he said going partying with your children, wearing the same clothes as them, trying to keep up with their youth with breast implants and surgery, erodes all boundaries - and leaves the children without a mother who can guide them.

“You see this all over the media with a lot of the actresses in Hollywood - their mothers are their friends,” said Los Angeles-based Poulter in a telephone interview.

“One tragic one is Lindsay Lohan. Her mother is out drinking with her. Now she’s been in and out of rehab and arrested twice. What kind of role model is she getting? Look at Paris Hilton too. Same story.”

He said Anna Nicole Smith, the former Playboy model, was another prime example. She died of an accidental prescription drug overdose in Florida in February 2007 - just five months after her 20-year-old son Daniel died of a drug overdose.

Poulter, who has just released a book called “The Mother Factor,” said this style of mothering had been on the rise for about 15 years but now accounted for 30-40 percent of mothers.

EPIDEMIC

“This really is an epidemic. Because of unresolved issues with their parents, some parents today don’t want to be so hard and just want their children to like them. At the end of a long working day they don’t want conflict,” he said.

“But kids need a parent, not another friend, and this leaves them motherless. This can create a lot of rage in boys, and daughters who are drug-orientated and out of control tend to be motherless daughters of this type.”

Rose Rock, the mother of U.S. comedian Chris Rock, who has raised 10 children of her own and looked after 17 foster children, has also warned about this shift in parenting.

She has laid down the 10 commandments of parenting in a new book, “Mama Rock’s Rules: Ten Lessons for Raising a Houseful of Successful Children,” and No. 1 is to be a child’s mama, not their friend — and to have rules in your house.

“At no time should you let your children think they can disrespect you or treat you like a buddy,” Rock told Reuters.

She attributed the rise in the number of mothers wanting to be their children’s best friend to a lack of time and to parents finding it is easier to let children lay down their own rules.

“It is a new thing that everyone wants their children to like them but parenting is not a popularity contest,” she said.

“I don’t need to be a 12-year-old’s friend but I do need to be their protector, guide and warden. This is just a cop out.”

Poulter says he tries to make families realize that they need to take back the traditional roles.

“I need the parents to recognize that they are not their child’s friend and get their kids’ respect and then the kids can separate from their mother and move forward in their life and not feel they are responsible for their mother,” he said.

“For the kids this can work. But I think it is very hard for the mother to shift and to become the parent.”

And the most NZ thing of all? Suspicion of all things foreign!

Only in NZ can a pizza get to your house faster than an ambulance.

Only in NZ do supermarkets make sick people walk all the way to the back of the shop to get their prescriptions while healthy people can buy cigarettes at the front.

Only in NZ do people order double cheeseburgers, large fries and a DIET coke

Only in NZ do banks leave both doors open and chain the pens to the counters

Only in NZ do we leave cars worth thousands of dollars on the drive and lock our junk and cheap lawn mower in the garage.

Only in NZ do we use answering machines to screen calls and then have call waiting so we won’t miss a call from someone we didn’t want to talk to in the first place.

Only in NZ are there disabled parking places in front of a skating rink.

NOT TO MENTION…

1 New Zealander dies each year testing if a 9v battery works on their tongue.

42 New Zealanders were injured in 1999 by not removing all pins from new shirts.

22 New Zealanders are injured each year by using sharp knives instead of screwdrivers.

5 New Zealanders have died since 1994 by watering their Christmas tree while the fairy lights were plugged in.

New Zealand Hospitals reported 2 broken or dislocated arms last year after Xmas cracker-pulling accidents.

Around 50 New Zealanders are burnt each year ironing their clothes while still wearing them.

9 New Zealanders had serious burns in 2000 trying on a new tops with a lit cigarette in their mouth.

A massive 143 New Zealanders were admitted to A&E in the last two years after trying to open bottles of beer with their teeth

And finally…

In 2003—14 New Zealanders were admitted to hospital with fractured skulls incurred whilst throwing up into the toilet.